That is not the premise of my argument at all. Even excepting the highly subjective argument that the PS3 is the best player on the market, my argument holds for two reasons.
1. It is inevitable that a better, cheaper player will be out long before PS3 reaches mass market adoption prices.
2. The PS3 is still a games machine, and is seen as such by the vast majority of consumers.
Many people have indicated that I have attacked the merit of Blu-Ray as a format, but this is not the case. What is the case is that I have used perfectly legitimate arguments to highlight why Blu-Ray isn't good for the PLAYSTATION THREE.
Someone here said that there are just a few people who have been swayed by the Blu-Ray's prescence to purchase a PS3, and that this is a good thing. But how many people do you think have been swayed against a PS3 purchase by the extra money and offense at having unneccessary technology trojan-horsed into the console. I am one of them I can tell you that.
Can I ask how many of the PS3 fanboys out there actually thought to themselves "gee, I hope the next PS has more disck capacity" PRIOR to Sony coming out and saying it was neccessary. And now that they have said that exactly what evidence have they given that convinces you???
starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS
